OFFICIAL: Cambridge doesn't care about non-academic ECs - and other things!

Then how come I have people on here saying "yes they do matter, they show time management skills, which is something Cambridge wants"?

Because people are willing to post all sorts of rubbish they've heard behind the bikesheds at school. What is worse some people will believe them. I've even seen people believe some of the information you have imparted once or twice.

Oh so it isn't true?

That's pretty much assumptions and it may be the case and if so, theyve exaggerated a bit too much. I just dont think its the reality of Oxbridge interviews. The answers they were giving aren't even to a-level standard in my opinion. I couldve given better answers with the knowledge of my GCSE english literature (which most people have to do) and A-level sociology (a-level psychology or any a-level sciences also cover aspects of controlling the investigation/ experiment for accurate results). I wasnt expecting degree level comments at all! I cant give degree level answers either since ive only just started my degree! I was just expecting high end a-level stuff thats all. Yes yes nerves play a part, but those interviews were just total disaster! And at the end of the day, these are meant to be some of the cleverest teenagers in the country i.e. oxbridge candidates getting a string of the highest grades academically. I would be in tears after such an interview.

The questions by the interviewers were how i expected them to be, to really get the interviewee to think deeply and to direct them in a particular line of thought in answering the question. But the answers were very very poor indeed. That girl was meant to be "the best in the class for biology"! She shouldnt be acting as a clever student in biology if she doesnt know anything about experiments. Furthermore, i just feel that the interviewers comments about the interviewees was shockingly generous!

Anyway, enough of this, Ive got january exams to revise for

Sorry if you disagree with me. I expected better from oxbridge candidates. Im rather surprised that I, a non-oxbridge student studying a different discipline, could do better, thats all.

That's pretty much assumptions and it may be the case and if so, theyve exaggerated a bit too much. I just dont think its the reality of Oxbridge interviews. The answers they were giving aren't even to a-level standard in my opinion. I couldve given better answers with the knowledge of my GCSE english literature (which most people have to do) and A-level sociology (a-level psychology or any a-level sciences also cover aspects of controlling the investigation/ experiment for accurate results). I wasnt expecting degree level comments at all! I cant give degree level answers either since ive only just started my degree! I was just expecting high end a-level stuff thats all. Yes yes nerves play a part, but those interviews were just total disaster! And at the end of the day, these are meant to be some of the cleverest teenagers in the country i.e. oxbridge candidates getting a string of the highest grades academically. I would be in tears after such an interview.

The questions by the interviewers were how i expected them to be, to really get the interviewee to think deeply and to direct them in a particular line of thought in answering the question. But the answers were very very poor indeed. That girl was meant to be "the best in the class for biology"! She shouldnt be acting as a clever student in biology if she doesnt know anything about experiments. Furthermore, i just feel that the interviewers comments about the interviewees was shockingly generous!

Anyway, enough of this, Ive got january exams to revise for

Sorry if you disagree with me. I expected better from oxbridge candidates. Im rather surprised that I, a non-oxbridge student studying a different discipline, could do better, thats all.

Actually, tbh I agree with you. I mean the biology girl, if I was in her situation I be talking all about how to make a fair test, the factors in it, the range of species involved e.g. different species and see how they react, the environment as well, light or no light and other things!
And that English boy, I would be talking about the literary techniques found in the poem and how it relates to life in which that poem was written, how the metaphors in the poem could mean something different and I would have inferred about what was happening in the poem and see the connections in the poem with Shakespeare and Wandsworth.

... And I don't even do English or Biology A-Level.

Actually, tbh I agree with you. I mean the biology girl, if I was in her situation I be talking all about how to make a fair test, the factors in it, the range of species involved e.g. different species and see how they react, the environment as well, light or no light and other things!
And that English boy, I would be talking about the literary techniques found in the poem and how it relates to life in which that poem was written, how the metaphors in the poem could mean something different and I would have inferred about what was happening in the poem and see the connections in the poem with Shakespeare and Wandsworth.

... And I don't even do English or Biology A-Level.

It shows.

What you've written about is very GCSE-esque too.

OK, what would your answer be...

It shows.

What you've written about is very GCSE-esque too.

I think on another thread it was found out that he's in year 9 i.e. not even started GCSE.

I think on another thread it was found out that he's in year 9 i.e. not even started GCSE.

OK, what would your answer be...

That's entirely dependent.

I haven't watched the video you guys are talking about, but the thing is, you've mentioned 'how it relates to life in which that poem was written' (so basically context). Unless this was the boy's chosen poets, the likelihood is that the exercise was a prat crit knowing Cambridge and thus, a knowledge of context isn't exactly what the admissions tutors would be looking for. Seeing 'the connections in the poem with Shakespeare and Wandsworth', who I presume is Wordsworth's internet alter-ego is a huge cop out. How do you know there are any connections? How do you know you could identify them? Is it even relevant to what the admissions tutors are asking?

You then say that you 'would have inferred about what was happening in the poem'; well duh. I don't know why you used 'inferred' at all, but firstly, some poems are ridiculously complex to understand. I actually misinterpreted a relatively simple poem in my interview, it's not quite as easy as it sounds. However, that's something that can be learned in about two minutes or less of teaching. What matters is not that you understand the poem's subject matter, but how you respond to it.

Finally, while metaphors are the most renowned and accessible literary technique, they are by no means the only ones, far from it. Someone talking about the ambiguity of metaphors, as if it were a foregone conclusion, would probably not go down brilliantly. Some poems don't have elaborate metaphors, some don't have ambiguous metaphors and some poems don't have metaphors at all.

As I said, I haven't watched the video, so I don't know if I've just spouted out a load of rubbish in relation to the actual video, but the interviews themselves are a different kettle of fish. For example, I'm sure biologists would be expected to know about fair tests, which is just common sense, and may just have been a warm up questions. The actual questions would no doubt have required actual specialist knowledge for biology and not just common sense.

I didn't mean that to sound like a vitriolic rant against you, it was really just some guidance. If indeed, you haven't started your GCSEs, then there's nothing to get worried about - it just seemed a little patronising that such a young student considers himself ready for an Oxbridge interview already, when the reality is that each interview can vary massively.

I must add, lest I get negged again (as I did for a joke in the 'hairdresser's thread a week or so back in this forum), that this was not meant to be a tirade against you im so academic and I hope I haven't come across as harsh or arrogant (I am certainly not a master of interviews).